From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37066138200 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:17:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7267BE0BC2; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84880E0B6B for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from portable (AMontpellier-651-1-434-83.w92-145.abo.wanadoo.fr [92.145.61.83]) (using SSLv3 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: aballier) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0101F33DBB0; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 15:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 17:17:26 +0200 From: Alexis Ballier To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: chithanh@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in profiles: ChangeLog package.mask Message-ID: <20130421171726.30334c70@portable> In-Reply-To: <517400BD.3060809@gentoo.org> References: <20130419091632.D01152171D@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <20130419153043.30ffc50c@portable> <5173F9F7.6050100@gentoo.org> <517400BD.3060809@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.17; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: efb01180-e3c3-4987-ba85-cf622aed8516 X-Archives-Hash: 060ea0fceff7d996d24d7abaa0201d0c On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 17:07:41 +0200 Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n wrote: > Denis Dupeyron schrieb: > >> When someone asks about changing a package which someone else > >> maintains, I always suggest reporting a bug about it. Do you think > >> that is generally ok, or not the proper way to communicate? > >=20 > > Exactly. Bugzilla is not a communication tool,=20 >=20 > > Communication is (in order of > > effectivity) in-person meeting, phone, irc, email. >=20 > But all comments in bugs are sent to the maintainer via email, at > least in default settings. So in my opinion, the communication aspect > of email is also included in bugzilla. >=20 > > If you're not using > > any of these tools you're not communicating effectively and you > > can't expect things to go smoothly. >=20 > I think that over direct email, bugzilla has the advantage of being > visible in the public record. And in contrast to mailing lists, only > interested parties will receive the messages. >=20 > But if you think that is not the case, we can ask council to clarify > whether a change announced in bugzilla counts as proper communication > with the maintainer. It's probably something in between: proper communication is when the other party has received and understood your message. It can fail in every of the above mentioned methods for a wide variety of reasons ;) (eg: poorly explained, not listening, not willing to listen, being drunk, gmail ate my email, etc.) Alexis.